Connect with us

Features

Speech writing for Mrs. B, mischievous Felix and 1965 general election

Published

on

Governor General Gopallawa was a pillar of rectitude

(Excerpted from Rendering unto Caesar, by Bradman Weerakoon

Making speeches and preparing for them, was a constant occupational hazard for the prime minister and her staff. The international speeches were clearly the most important from a personal as well as country’s image-building point of view. Sirimavo gained immense credit from a statement she made in Belgrade at the Nonaligned Summit in 1961, when as the first woman prime minister of the world she used the phrase — As a woman and a mother, I call upon the nations of the world to desist from violence in their dealings with each other …’This phrase,was unique as no other world leader up to then could have used it, and was carried in headlines across the world giving Sirimavo and Ceylon a tremendous boost.

The trouble with great phrases is that once they are made, they cannot be used again, or if so, very sparingly. We faced this problem acutely in Cairo in 1964, at the next Non-aligned Summit. Once again, the drafting team was Felix, Glannie and myself Sirimavo had told us in advance that we must try to make it as powerful as the speech that she had done in Belgrade. We tried as hard as we could, but could not come up with any extra-bright ideas as we struggled through the draft for the rest day, a day before the opening. As a break from our labours, that afternoon we went to visit the Cairo Museum. It was eerie, being so physically close to the Pharaohs, dead and mummified, some three thousand years ago.

Late that evening we were still at it trying to find the magic breakthrough. At 9.30 that night Sirimavo peeped into the room on her way to bed and asked, “How are you doing? Have you found anything exciting to say?” At which point, Felix, at his most mischievous, softly said, “No, not yet Sirima. But how would you like to start it like this, now that you are in Cairo, As a woman and a mummy, I call upon, etc, etc.’ Sirimavo yelled at him, “Felix!” as if she could have strangled him and chuckling softly to herself, turned away closing the door behind her.

The Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement

The question of the citizenship rights of the Tamils of Indian origin who worked on the plantations was something always high on Sirimavo’s agenda. She was well aware of the political implications of the issue. She had personal knowledge of the condition of the people working on estates and the sad quality of their lives, from her childhood in the province of Sabaragamuwa, which had a large number of plantations in both tea and rubber. The Federal Party too, had included citizenship of the Indian Tamils as part of their basic four-point minimum agenda.

The Tamils of recent Indian origin, as a group, had been disenfranchised through the Citizenship Acts of 1949. They had little representation in Parliament, and since the 1950s had been represented only through one or two nominated members of Parliament. Soon after independence, in the first Parliament of 1947, they had had as many as 11 representatives in a House of 101 MPs. The legislation of 1949 had removed most of the Indian Tamil voters from the electoral lists in the up-country areas and their representation by Tamil members of Parliament had declined.

This had enabled, what were referred to as the `Kandyan electorates’, to be represented thereafter more by boomiputras – sons of the soil – rather than by representatives who were deemed to have only a marginal interest in Ceylon and a greater loyalty to India. This was the prevalent feeling among a section of the population who were proud to refer to themselves as Kandyan Sinhalese and the last to be brought under British rule in 1815. But, it had left behind a feeling of having been discriminated against, in the minds of the plantation Tamils and was to be a constant factor in their political agenda.

The Federal Party had been quick to make common cause with the plantation Tamils on this account using it as another example of the domineering character of the majority Sinhalese state.

Sirimavo realized that the critical issue in this very complex she had serious concerns, was to come to agreement with India on the specific numbers as to who would become Ceylon citizens and those who would become Indian citizens. On a visit to New Delhi in October 1964, she arrived at a historic settlement of this problem which had long evaded resolution. The Indo-Ceylon Agreement or the Sirima-Shastri Pact, it was popularly called, was undoubtedly the high point during this period of her two terms as the prime minister of the country.

I recall her telephoning me from Delhi to inquire what the reactions were in Colombo about the Agreement which stated that Ceylon would accept 300,000 of these persons as citizens. I believe she was bothered as to whether this number might be regarded as too large. I assured her that considering that there were at the time many as 975,000 persons of Indian origin in Ceylon and that India had accepted to take 525,000 as citizens of India, we had come out rather well in the negotiations.

It would mean in effect that for every four persons of recent Indian origin we took in as citizens, India would take seven. If the Agreement worked out according to plan around 15,000 persons of Indian origin would be repatriated annually over a spread of about 15 years. Things finally did not work out precisely as planned on schedule. But after a while, a regular flow of repatriation took place and the problem which had strained relations between India and Ceylon, and also become a domestic political issue for long, was resolved. It was one of the most notable political and diplomatic achievements that Sirimavo could take credit for.

Her personal touch in foreign relations

Sirimavo evinced great interest in events occurring around the world and brought a personal touch into her dealings with world leaders. Unexpected and dramatic change would affect her in a very personal way. I recall the evident sadness with which she spoke to me on the morning of President Kennedy’s assassination. Her thoughts were of the grieving widow, Jacqueline and the two children Caroline and John junior. It must have brought memories of what she herself had experienced in September 1959.

Frances Willis, the US ambassador had broken the news to her in the early hours of the morning. Frances was the first of a long line of female Heads of the Foreign Missions who came to be appointed for duty in Ceylon at the time on the assumption that they being female, would have easier entry to a woman prime minister than a male ambassador. It did not always work that way, but between Frances and Sirimavo, who were both very dignified in behaviour, there was an excellent rapport.

This certainly helped with all the actions we were taking at the time which were considered adverse to US interests, like the take-over of the oil distribution business which was then shared by the giant transnationals – Shell, Caltex and Mobiloil. At Kennedy’s death, Sirimavo wanted a well-drafted message of sympathy to Jacqueline Kennedy, which was sent by cypher to our ambassador in Washington for handing over. Similarly, the death of Feroze Gandhi, her friend Indira’s husband, also evoked a long and supportive letter of sympathy. She was very good about keeping in touch with her wide circle of friends abroad especially at moments of personal grief

President Tito and his wife Jovanka Broz were also special friends after the many occasions they had been together on the Non-aligned circuit. Yugoslavia was a favourite country of hers, and Sirimavo went as often as she could, both officially and privately, because there she had found a place for effective treatment of the knee problem which troubled her often. She liked the ‘alternative medicine’ method of therapeutic mud-packs, somewhat reminiscent of our own ayurveda which was practised in the clinic in Bratislava on the Adriatic coast. This was the only health problem that she had, throughout the four and a half years of her first premiership. I believe the lift at Temple Trees was installed at this time as she found it very painful, at times when the knee became inflamed, to climb the stairs to her bedroom upstairs. Once or twice, I even had to carry the official files into her room and she would attend to the papers quite cheerily, while propped up in bed.

Administrative Reform at home

Sirimavo made some important changes in public service administration both at the top and the bottom of the ladder. I had a feeling that Felix was very much behind all this. In 1963 after much consideration, the Ceylon Civil Service was abolished and replaced by the Ceylon Administrative Service constructed on broader recruitment base. The writing had been on the wall for a while. The primary reason for the change seemed to be that, Felix particularly, and a few of the other ministers, were not too comfortable with having their chief administrative advisors being people with their own individual minds and opinions.

They would have preferred less debate and more action once the political decisions had been taken. It was not so much obstruction, as the perceived continuing challenge to their authority, which was galling. How much easier it would be if one had more obedient, less intellectually inclined, and less argumentative people to take their orders and carry them out, seemed to be the basic reasoning which the Cabinet accepted.

There was some truth in these suppositions. The Ceylon Civil Service (CCS) which was very much an elite club with its own subculture, still tried to maintain the tradition of the impartial, learned, and omnicompetent advisor. Raw entrants to the service in the post-independence period, were increasingly academically brilliant young men coming in from the rural Maha Vidyalayas. But they were quickly schooled by their peers in the CCS who largely came from the traditional urban public schools, which had earlier produced the base of the service, into the ‘culture’, and became ofttimes stronger keepers of the tradition than their mentors.

After the political revolution of 1956 and the emergence of a new breed of politicians, all this had been under attack. The CCS seemed to be supremely indifferent to the profound changes going on, unless the changes affected their own interests. Radical change in the objectives and methods of governance were afoot. The accent being on delivering what the people at the grassroots wanted, and delivering it quickly. Felix seriously felt that many of the Ceylon Civil Service administrators were too ‘dyed in the wool’ in old-school ways and methods.

What he thought of them was that there was too much of the observance of the letter of the law and not enough sensitivity to the spirit of the new times. In a way there was much truth in what he was saying because the civil servants had the independence of doing things the way they wanted to because of the levels of education and achievement they possessed academically, and also since most of them had independent means. A civil servant was a prized catch for the daughter of a successful businessman or a rich land owner. There were many CC S men of acute intellectual brilliance who had been snared by very rich bus magnates or owners of vast acres of coconut and rubber land. Felix’s point was that with all this acquired wealth behind them would they be able to implement the programme of socialistic reforms the government had in mind?

So without much ado in 1963 all of us civil servants were given the option to retire immediately ‘on abolition of office terms’, or of retiring within the next 10 years on the same generous terms. Several of the older ones left pretty soon while some of the younger ones, like myself, remained to exercise the option at a later stage of our career. Similarly, Sirimavo with Felix’s help, made a strategically important structural change at the bottom of the administrative chain of the highly centralized structure of government in place at the time. This was the abolition of the office of the ‘Village Headman’ and his replacement by the more homely grama sevaka – the servant of the people.

The role of the Governor-General

The results of the general elections called by Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike in 1965 were inconclusive. The SLFP-led front had not obtained an outright majority of parliamentary seats. The UNP, among the parties that had contested, had won the most number of seats. Sirimavo who always wanted to scrupulously observe the rules and procedures asked me to prepare the usual letters of resignation of her government.

However there were other political forces at work attempting to persuade her to consider other options, before resigning. One such, put forward by Dr Colvin R de Silva, the astute legal brain of the LSSP, was to hold on and face a vote of confidence when Parliament met in ten days time. The debate was fast and furious and tempers ran high. As usual much was at stake. I recall very clearly the alignment of forces. Those of the Left were arguing for the prime minister to stay on, and let the issue be decided by

Parliament when it met. Others, mainly her family members, like her Private Secretary Mackie, Felix and Lakshmi Bandaranaike and James and Siva Obeysekere, were for her doing, what she wanted to do, which was to resign and allow the governor-general the opportunity to call whomever he thought could form a government, to do so.

The delay in the prime minister resigning was leading to unruly behaviour in the city. Outside in the city. Outside Temple Trees a crowd of people gathered at the gates in support of Sirimavo. I saw my university colleague, the diminutive Stanley Tillekeratne, then an SLFP back-bencher, orating before the restive crowd. Through all this William Gopallawa, the governor-general acted with impeccable integrity.

At times like these, the role of the governor-general in terms of the constitution came into its own. At normal times although the highest in the land protocol-wise, he had no effective power to act on his own. After a general election however, and one which was indecisive, he was endowed with wide discretionary power. He could in his discretion, when informed by the prime minister that she had resigned, summon a leader of a political party to form a government, if in his view that political leader could command the confidence of Parliament. He could also, in circumstances that nobody else could do, call on the resigned prime minister to try to win the support of other parties and produce proof that he/she could command the confidence of the House.

It was an excruciatingly difficult time for Gopallawa. It was Sirimavo who in the aftermath of the failed coup d’etat in 1962, and the removal of Sir Oliver, recommended his name to the Queen for appointment as governor-general. There were links of kinship between the Bandaranaikes and the Gopallawas. The other party, in the wings – the UNP – might deal harshly with him if they came in, since he had been appointed by the SLFP.

None of these considerations bothered Gopallawa when it came to doing his duty. During those critical hours when the country’s fate, hung in the balance as it were, Gopallawa was unshakable in his devotion to duty. Almost every hour he would call me to ask whether the prime minister had made up her mind. Once, in exasperation, he asked me whether he should send over Erskine May, the authoritative book on parliamentary procedure and practice, with the relevant portions highlighted. I begged for time.

I was being given a difficult time by the left members. They resented my advice to Sirimavo that she resign and leave it open to the governor-general to take the matter further. Finally Colvin ordered me to leave the room. I countered that I worked for the prime minister and would only leave if the prime minister asked me to do so. Sirimavo remained calm and said nothing. So I remained.

That night dejected and disappointed at the delay, my car was stoned as I drove down Cotta Road to my home in Rajagiriya. I announced tearfully to Damayanthi that I would be resigning the next day if there was not a proper outcome. Around seven the next morning I had a call from Mackie asking me to come to TT (Temple Trees) as soon as possible as the prime minister had decided to sign the letter. I got back to TT, had the letter signed and was coming down the stairs when I met a small group of those who had been trying to persuade the prime minister to stay on, coming up.

I ignored their rather black looks and went over to Queens House. Gopallawa was much relieved and immediately sent for Dudley to see whether he had the required majority. The hero of the story for me was Gopallawa. His had been a supreme act of patriotism; an act of loyalty to the state which transcended party, kinship and even personal obligation.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Viktor Orban, Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump: The Terrible Threes of the 21st Century

Published

on

Orban (center) Trump and Netanyahu

In the autumn of 1956, Hungary staged the first uprising against the 20th century Soviet behemoth. Seventy years later, in the spring of 2026 Hungary has delivered the first electoral thrashing against 21st century right wing populism in Europe. The 1956 uprising was crushed after seven days. But the opposition scored a landslide victory in Hungary’s parliamentary election held on Sunday, April 12 and. Viktor Orban, Prime Minister since 2010 and the architect of what he proudly called “the illiberal state”, was resoundingly defeated. Orban who has been a pain in the neck for the European Union was a close ally of US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Trump even dispatched his Vice President JD Vance to Budapest to campaign for Orban. After Orban’s defeat, Trump and his MAGA followers may be having nightmares about the US midterm elections in November. Similarly, Orban’s defeat has reportedly caused “great concern in the halls of power in Jerusalem.” Netanyahu has lost his only ally in the European Union and the opposition victory in Hungary does not augur well for his own electoral prospects in the Israeli elections due in October.

Ceasefire Hopes

Trump and Netanyahu have bigger things to worry about in the Middle East and among their own political bases. Trump is going bonkers, blasphemously imitating Christ and badmouthing the Pope, launching a blockade in the Strait of Hormuz and strong arming more talks in Islamabad. Netanyahu has been forced to sit on his hands, pausing his fight against Iran while pursuing peace talks with Lebanon. The leaders and diplomats from Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey are shuttling around drumming up support for another round of talks in Islamabad and a prolonged extension of the ceasefire.

Further talks in Islamabad and potential extension of the ceasefire received a new boost by Trump’s announcement of a new 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. The background to this development appears to be Iran’s insistence on having this secondary ceasefire, and Trump insisting on ceasefire abidance by Hezbollah in return for his ordering Netanyahu to stop his brutal ‘lawn mowing’ in Lebanon. All of this might seem to augur well for a potential extension of the primary ceasefire between the US and Iran. There are also reports of the narrowing of gap between the two parties – involving a potential moratorium on Iran’s uranium enrichment, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran’s access to its frozen assets estimated to be $100 billion.

Meanwhile the IMF has released its latest World Economic Outlook with a grim forecast. “Once again, says the report, “the global economy is threatened with being thrown off the course – this time by the outbreak of war in the Middle East.” Before the war, the IMF was expected to upgrade its growth forecasts for the global economy. Now it is going to be weaker growth and higher inflation with oil price optimistically stabilizing around $100 a barrel in 2026 and $75 a barrel in 2027. In a worst case scenario, if the oil prices were to hit $110 in 2026 and $125 in 2027, growth everywhere will further weaken and inflation will go further up in countries big and small.

In a joint statement on the Middle East, the Finance Ministers of the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, Spain, Norway, Republic of Ireland, Poland and New Zealand have called on the IMF and World Bank “to provide a coordinated emergency support offer for countries in need, tailored to country circumstances and drawing on the full range and flexibility of their tool kits.” They have also welcomed “advice on domestic responses that are temporary, targeted, and effective, and encourage work to identify steps needed to protect long-term growth.”

Subversion from the Right

The two men, Trump and Netanyahu, who started the war and precipitated the current crisis are not being held accountable by anyone and they are still free to do what they want and as they please. The third man, Victor Orban, who did not have anything to do with the war but extended wholehearted ideological and political support as a faithful apprentice to the two older sorcerers, has been democratically defeated. Together, they formed the terrible threes of the 21st century, spearheading a subversion from the right of the emerging liberal status quo of the post Cold War world. Orban’s defeat is a significant setback to the illiberal right, but it is not the end of it.

The three emerged in the specific historical contexts of their own polities that are both vastly different and yet share powerful ingredients that have proved to be politically potent. The broader context has been the end of the Cold War and the removal of the perceived external threat which opened up the domestic political space in the US, for locking horns over primarily cultural standpoints and climate politics. This era began with the Clinton presidency in 1992 and the election of Barack Obama 16 years later, in 2008, created the illusion of a post-racial America.

In reality, the right was able to push back – first with the younger Bush presidency (2000-2008) pursuing compassionate conservatism, and later with the foray of Trump (2016-2020) threatening to end what he called the “American Carnage.” Of the 32 years since the election of Bill Clinton, Democrats have controlled the White House for 20 years over five presidential terms (Clinton – two, Obama – two, and Biden -one), while the Republicans won three terms (Bush – two, Trump – one) spanning 12 years.

Trump has since won a second term for another four years, but already in his five+ years in office he has issued executive orders to roll back almost all of the liberal advancements in the realms of civil rights, equality, diversity and inclusion. All that the celebrated acronym DEI (Diversity, Equality and Inclusion) stands for has been executively ordered to be banished from the state, its agencies and its programs.

In Europe, the European Union became the champion and bulwark of liberalism and subsidiarity, which in turn provoked the rise of right wing populism in every member country. Brexit was the loudest manifestation against what was considered to be EU’s overreach, but after Britain’s bitter Brexit experience the populists in the European countries gave up on demanding their own exit and limited themselves to fighting the EU from their national bases.

Viktor Orban became the face and voice of anti-EU nationalists. But he and his political party, the Christian Nationalist Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Alliance, are not the only one. Nigel Farage’s Reform UK in Britain and Marine Le Pen’s National Rally Party in France are becoming real electoral contenders, while right wing presidents have been elected in Argentina and Chile.

The rise and fall of Viktor Orban

Of the three terribles, Orban is the youngest but with the longest involvement in politics. Born in 1963, Viktor Orban became a political activist as a 15-year old high schooler, becoming secretary of a Young Communist League local. He continued his activism while studying law in Budapest, visiting Poland and writing his thesis on the Polish Solidarity movement, giving lectures in West Germany and the US as a potential future Hungarian leader, and undertaking research on European civil society at Pembroke College, Oxford.

At the age of 26, Orban gained national prominence with a speech he delivered on June 16, 1989 in Budapest’s Heroes’ Square to mark the reburial of Imre Nagy and other Hungarians killed in the 1956 uprising. Imre Nagy was the leader of the 1956 Hungarian uprising against the puppet Soviet Union outpost in Budapest.

To digress and make a local connection – the pages of Sri Lanka’s parliamentary Hansard of 1956, contain an impressive record of the political debate in Sri Lanka over the events in Hungary. The LSSP’s Colvin R de Silva eloquently led the Trotskyite prosecution of the Soviet invasion of Hungary and the suppression of its freedoms. Pieter Keuneman of the Communist Party used his wit and debating skills to defend the indefensible. GG Ponnambalam, the unrepentant anti-communist, used the opportunity to take swipes on both sides. Finally, for the government, Prime Minister SWRD Bandaranaike deployed his own oratorical skills to empathize with the uprising without condemning the USSR. The four men were Sri Lanka’s foremost verbal gladiators and they used the occasion to put on quite a display of their talents.

Back to Hungary, where Orban began his political vocation identifying himself with Imre Nagy and demanding the withdrawal of the Soviet army from Hungary and calling for free elections in that country to elect a new government. That same year in 1989, Fidesz was recognized as a political party; Orban became its leader four years later in 1993 and led the party and its allies to their first victory and formed a new government in 1998. At age 35 Orban became the second youngest Prime Minister in Hungary’s history.

During his first term, Orban started well on the economy, reducing inflation and the budget deficit, was welcomed to the White House by President George W. Bush, and led Hungary to join NATO overruling Russian objections. But the slide into authoritarianism and corruption was just as quick, including the attempt to replace the two-thirds parliamentary majority requirement by a simple majority. By the end of the term the ruling coalition disintegrated and Orban lost the 2002 election and became the leader of the opposition over the next two terms till 2010.

Orban returned to power with a two-thirds majority in 2010 and immediately introduced a new constitution that set the stage for ushering in the illiberal state. What had been previously a communist state now became a Christian state where ‘traditional values’ of gender rights, sexuality, and exclusive nationalism were constitutionally enshrined. The electoral system was changed reducing the number parliamentarians from 386 to 199 – with 103 of them directly elected and 93 assigned proportionately. Orban went on to win three more elections over 16 years – in 2014, 2018 and 2022 – each with a two-thirds majority, and used the time and power to transform Hungary into a conservative fortress in Europe.

The new constitution and its frequent amendments were used to centralize legislative and executive power, curb civil liberties, restrict freedom of speech and the media, and to weaken the constitutional court and judiciary. It was his opposition to non-white immigration that made him “the talisman of Europe’s mainstream right”. He described immigration as the West’s answer to its declining population and flatly rejected it as a solution for Hungary. Instead, he told his compatriots, “we need Hungarian children.” His ‘Orbanomics’ policies restricted abortion and encouraged family formation – forgiving student debt for female students having or adopting children, life-long tax holiday for women with four or more children, and sponsoring fixed-rate mortgages for married couples.

Orban wanted to make Hungary an “ideological center for … an international conservative movement”. Orban heaped praise on Jair Bolsonaro for making Brazil the best example of a “modern Christian democracy.” He endorsed Trump in every one of Trump’s three presidential elections, the only European leader to do so. In return, Orban has been described by US MAGA ideologue Steve Bannon as “Trump before Trump.” Orban’s attack on universities for being the citadels of liberalism have found their echoes in Trump’s America and Modi’s India.

For all his efforts in making Hungary a conservative ideological centre, Viktor Orban’s undoing came about because of Hungary’s growing economic crises and the depth of corruption and systemic nepotism that engulfed the government. The economy has tanked over the last three years with rising prices and the national debt reaching 75% of the GDP – the highest among East European countries. Orban’s critics have exposed and the people have experienced systemic corruption that enabled the siphoning of public wealth into private accounts, the creation of a ‘neo-feudal capitalist class’, and the enrichment of family and friends. Orban’s corruption became the central plank of the opposition platform that Peter Magyar and his Tisza Party presented to the voters and caused his ouster after 16 years.

The Prime Minister elect is not a dyed in the wool liberal, but a member of a conservative Budapest family, and a politician cut from the old Orban cloth. Magyar (literally meaning “Hungarian”) was once a “powerful insider” in the Fidesz government – notably active in foreign affairs, while his ex-wife was once the Minister of Justice in Orban’s cabinet. Mr. Magyar may not fully roll back all of Orban’s illiberalism, but he has committed himself to eliminating corruption, increasing social welfare spending, limiting the prime ministerial tenure to two terms, and being more pro-European, EU and NATO.

EU and European leaders have openly welcomed the change in Hungary, and may be looking for the new government to change Orban’s vetoing of a number of EU initiatives, especially those involving assistance to Ukraine. In return, the new government in Hungary will be expecting the unfreezing of as much as $33 billion funds that the EU extraordinarily chose to freeze as punishment for Orban’s illiberal initiatives in Hungary. For Trump and Netanyahu, the defeat of Viktor Orban removes their only ally and supporter in all of Europe.

by Rajan Philips

Continue Reading

Features

ICONS:A Dialogue Across Centuries

Published

on

Sky Gallery of the Fareed Uduman Art Forum is dedicated to bringing audiences, cultures, and time periods together through meaningful and accessible art experiences to create the closest possible encounters with the world’s greatest paintings. Previous exhibitions include, Gustav Klimt, Frida Kahlo, Paul Gauguin, Vincent Van Gogh, Salvador Dali.

ICONS is conceived as “a dialogue across centuries” bringing together over a dozen artistic geniuses whose works span the Renaissance to the modern era. These works at their original scales of creation changes the conversation. You can finally stand in front of a life-size Vermeer or a monumental Monet and feel the dialogue between artists who never met but shaped each other across time. Each exhibit is meticulously presented on canvas, hand-framed, and finished at the exact dimensions of the original masterpieces, preserving the integrity of composition, texture, brushwork, color and scale.

At the heart of the exhibition is Jan van Eyck’s ‘Arnolfini Portrait’, a work that epitomizes the detail, symbolism, and human intimacy that have inspired generations of artists. Alongside it, visitors will encounter paintings that shaped the renaissance, impressionism, modernism, and the evolution of visual storytelling by Munch, Matisse, Monet, Degas, Da Vinci, Renoir, Vermeer, Rembrandt, Cézanne, Caravaggio, and more. The exhibition invites audiences to experience a rare conversation across centuries of artistic brilliance.

By bringing together works that are geographically and historically dispersed, ICONS creates a compelling space for comparison, reflection, and discovery. Visitors are invited to move beyond passive viewing into a more engaged encounter—tracing artistic influence, identifying stylistic shifts, and uncovering unexpected connections between artists who never shared the same physical space, yet remain deeply interconnected across time.

Designed and curated for both seasoned art enthusiasts and first-time visitors, ICONS offers an experience that is at once educational, immersive, and accessible—removing many of the traditional barriers associated with global museum-going.

Exhibition Details:

Dates: April 24 – May 3
Time: 10:00 AM – 5:00 PM (Monday – Sunday)
Venue: Sky Gallery Colombo 5

Continue Reading

Features

Our Teardrop

Published

on

BOOK REVIEW

Ranoukh Wijesinha (2026)

Published by Jam Fruit Tree Publications.
82 pages. Softcover. ISBN 978-624-6633-81-3

The author is a graduate teacher at St. Thomas’ College, Mount Lavinia; his alma mater. On leaving school he read for a Bachelor of Arts Degree in English Language and English Literature at the University of Nottingham (Malaysia). On graduating, in 2024, he went back to his old school to teach these same disciplines. There seems to be a historic logic to this as his grandfather, a notable Thomian of his day, also started his working career as a teacher at the College before moving on to the world of publishing; as a newspaper journalist and sub-editor.

On his maternal side, Wijesinha’s grandfather was an accomplished journalist, thespian and playwright of his day, and his mother is also a much sought after teacher of English and English Literature and, as acknowledged by him, his first, and foremost, English teacher.

Ranoukh Wijesinha and friends at STC

Though there are some well-written, almost lyrical, pieces of prose in this publication, it is the poetry that dominates. Written with a sensitivity to people and events he has either observed himself, or as described to him by those who did, it also encompasses all genres of poetic verse, from the classical to the modern, including sonnets, acrostics, haiku to free and blank verse, the latter more in vogue today. All in all, it presents as a celebration of English poetry and its ability to, sometimes, express depth of thought and feeling far better than prose.

Dedicated to his mentor at St. Thomas’, his Drama and Singing Master had been a great influence on Wijesinha His sudden, premature, death understandably came as a shock to the still developing student under his tutelage. The poems “The Man who Made Me” and “The Curtain Called” best demonstrate this. In addition, it is apparent that Wijesinha has endured much mental trauma in his young life. Spending much time on his own, the questions these moments have raised are expressed in “When No One is Listening”, “There was a Time”, “Midnight Walks” and the prose “A Ramble through Colombo”.

However, the majority of the poems concern ‘Our Teardrop’, Sri Lanka, for whom the writer has a great love. He explores its history, its natural wonders, its people, its tragedies, its corruption and the hope that things will get better for all its people. “Bala’ and “Dicky” address a time of violence from days gone by when there were few glories, just victims. “Easter Sunday” brings this almost to the present time.

There also is humour. “Ado, Machang, Bro, Dude” celebrates his friends and friendships in a way that will reverberate with all the present and previous generations of those who are, or were once, in their late teens and early twenties.

There is little to criticise in this first of the writer’s forays into published works except, as referred to previously, to re-state that the prose quails in the face of the power of the poetry. It is all well written, filled with passion and compassion, and gives comfort that there still are young Sri Lankan writers who can be this brave, and write so powerfully, and profoundly, in English. It is hoped that this is just the first of many from the pen of this young writer.

L S M Pillai

Continue Reading

Trending